Sunday, June 14, 2009

Netanyahu emphasizes Israel's God-given right to the 'Land of Israel'

"Mean-spirited in the extreme, he emphasized on Israel's god-given right to the "Land of Israel" (euphemism for Israel Plus--plus Judea and Samaria, i.e., the West Bank, aka Palestine). And on Israel's right to all of Jerusalem. There was not a generous word about the Palestinians. Only the usual tone of threat. There was no surprise in this, of course, but the nasty, supercilious, and hypernationalist tone even took my breath away."
Mondoweiss
------------
Not an article from Weiss, just a short comment. On the other hand the comments (on his comment) are very interesting and quite instructive...A must!

37 comments:

  1. Here's one:
     
    "Nantayahu has agreed to nothing more than a name change for Israel's brutal occupation of the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. The occupation will be deceptively passed off as an independent state for the Palestinian people.

    Netanyahu's so-called concession to the Obama admin. is laughable and an insult to the Palestinian people. It is up to the Obama admin. to use its leverage to force Netanyahu to negotiate a just peace agreement with the Palestinians. The Obama admin. can do this by tying US aid to Israel's progress on the peace agreement with the Palestinians. Otherwise, the Palestinians and arab countries should not support the so-called peace process, which will only be a plot to gain legitimacy for Israel and its brutal occupation of the Palestinian people."

    ReplyDelete
  2. And another:
     
    "Here are a few translations(Netanyahu's speech) from colonial Zionist babble to English.

    The simple truth is that the root of the conflict has been ? and remains - the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish People to its own state in its historical homeland.

    The simple truth is that the root of the conflict has been and remains the refusal of Palestinians to leave their homes, farms, and land and let us colonize them. It is ours now, in spite of the fact that Israel ceased to exist 2000 years ago, because Israel existed 2000 years ago and some 3000 year old religious texts say God gave it to us forever. It is irrelevant that other people have been living there for the last 2000 years. That's their tough luck: they have to move.

    C.M. - I have much sympathy for arguments based on a Jewish need for a safe haven from possible future exterminatory antisemitism. I have no problem with a Jewish state that does not harm American interests. However, I have zero sympathy for lunatic religious arguments, especially when those making them don't believe in them, but are using them in an attempt to resonate with Americans who may in order to keep the subsidies for colonization flowing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The comment continues:
     
    "We withdrew from the Gaza Strip to the last centimeter, we uprooted dozens of settlements and turned thousands of Israelis out of their homes. In exchange, what we received were missiles raining down on our cities, our towns and our children. The argument that withdrawal would bring peace closer did not stand up to the test of reality.

    "We withdrew" our colonies from Gaza in 2005 because the IDF had to station almost as many soldiers as colonists to protect said colonists from the vastly more numerous Palestinians whose land they stolen at gunpoint. We realized we were throwing good money after bad and that ethnic cleansing and colonization of Gaza wasn't going to be successful. Former P.M. Sharon decided that Israel's military resources would be better utilized supporting colonization of the West Bank, where the population density of Palestinians is lower and our network of Jewish-only roads, internal checkpoints, and other population control measures better keep the indigenous people properly docile and compliant.

    "In exchange" for us giving back the land we stole at gunpoint, we instituted a blockade of all Gazan borders in an attempt to hinder Palestinians from economic, social, and political development. Just between you and me, we are a little pissed at them for successfuly resisting ethnic cleansing, and felt a little 'payback' was in order. We eventually removed the IDF from the Philadelphia Corridor (on the Gaza-Egypt border) and let the Egyptians have partial control of the border crossing there. This was safe to do because the Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak is being bribed with $2 billion per year to cooperate with us, and he needs the money to pay for the medieval system of patronage by which he maintains his rule. He can be trusted to do what is in his best interest which, thanks to usefully-idiotic American taxpayers (guided by the Lobby), happily coincides with our own.

    "The argument" that the removal of our colonies and subsequent blockade of Gaza, especially our very helpful prevention of any commercial traffic from Gazan ports to the outside world through the seaward western Gazan border onto international waters, would inflict enough misery on Gazans to accept the blockade and de facto Israel occupation as a permanent institution "did not stand up to the test of reality".

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nothing but common settler state claims -
     
    "The logic of both Israel and apartheid-era South Africa can be found in their common origins as settler states. In both cases, the settlers CREATED MYTHS, semi-religious or explicitly religious, including that GOD HAD PROVIDED THE LAND for them and that the land was unoccupied upon arrival, a very, very common theme in every settler state, whether it's the United States, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, etc. In both cases, the settlers portrayed themselves to be VICTIMS against natives who were described as SEMI-BARBARIC OR INTOLERANT. Given the permanent state of siege, every settler state AGGRESSION came to be DESCRIBED as a DEFENSIVE ACT, an approach also common with the United States. By way of example, for South Africa, incursions into Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe or anywhere else always against alleged TERRORISTS were justified as alleged defensive actions."
     
    http://notinhisname.blogdrive.com/archive/cm-09_cy-2007_m-09_d-27_y-2007_o-0.html
     
     

    ReplyDelete
  5. You will note that this ass continues to say one thing internationally, and another internally to Israel

    ReplyDelete
  6. Here is the "full Text" of bullshit -
     
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092810.html

    ReplyDelete
  7. It's really very simple. Israel has no right to any land whether the pretext is historical or temporal! You don't show 2000 years after you left and ask the people who've been living there  even as old you've been there and who's been minding it the whole time to move out. It's impolite as a starter and nonsensical which ever way you turn it and I'm very polite!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. In other words, less measured this time, "go and f...yourself!"

    ReplyDelete
  9. It's really very simple. Israel has no right to any land whether the pretext is historical or temporal! You don't show 2000 years after you left and ask the people who've been living there  even as old you had had been there and who's been minding it the whole time to move out. It's impolite as a starter and nonsensical which ever way you turn it and I'm very polite!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. In other words, less measured this time, "go and f...yourself!"

    ReplyDelete
  11. It's really very simple. Israel has no right to any land whether the pretext is historical or temporal! You don't show 2000 years after you left and ask the people who've been living there  even as old you had had been there and who's been minding it the whole time to move out. It's impolite as a starter and nonsensical which ever way you turn it and I'm very polite!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. In other words, less measured this time, "go and f... yourself!"

    ReplyDelete
  13. Are you saying then, there is no point to a negotiated settlement, tgia? It is all or nothing?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Off topic but here are some photos from Iran.
     
    http://shooresh1917.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm saying what I think is obviously right but would never tell a Palestinian what to do! NEVER! I have no right especially when I think that most if not all Palestinians want a settlement and peace. I, also believe a peace agreement through negotiations should be reached and whichever solution is acceptable to the Palestinians is acceptable to me. Now, do I think it would be fair to share, even equally, this land? Of course not but if it was up to me I'd make peace because that's the only reasonable sensible goal!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Realpolitics!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Note that I did not say that the Jews has no right to live in Palestine, I'm not a lunatic and I know my history and know that Jews have been there forever! But the right to an exclusive Jewish state?! Nincompoops!!!

    ReplyDelete
  18. No, you are definitely not a lunatic. Did you have your exhibition?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I find it extremely OBSCENE and vomit inducing to think that a brooklynite or a Polish (Jewish or not) has a divine right to a squared inch of land than a Palestinian who's been there forever! There will be, I hope, times when things will settle down a bit and we sit down to think about!! This strange idea of replacing one ethnic group, not by another(!!!) but by a heteroclite group who share little apart from a religious belief and sometimes not even that!!

    ReplyDelete
  20. The question of vza is not settlement, her question is bowing deeply to aggression and theft. You see, because the only scenario you can come with after you have been hopelessly indoctrinated in might makes right is - how far can they bend over.  How much legitimacy can you give to a totally illegitimate enterprise.  How much more sacrifice can you exact from people who have lost everything - and it is  all "ok" because the omnipotent USA approves of it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yes thanks for asking. Unfortunatly it wasn't all that well timed since the day we were hanging, a week ago, we were saying farewell to mom who passed away 10 days ago.
    I'll be posting stuff from the exhibit as soon as I take photos.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "I find it extremely OBSCENE and vomit inducing to think that a brooklynite or a Polish (Jewish or not) has a divine right to a squared inch of land than a Palestinian who's been there forever!"
     
    I agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "The question of vza is not settlement, her question is bowing deeply to aggression and theft."
     
    Oh baloney. I take it you do NOT agree with a negotiated settlement then?

    ReplyDelete
  24. In fact, this morning I read an article about a New York Jewish man who lives part of the year in the U.S. and part of the year in a settlement and he could not for the life of him, figure out how the settlements had adversely impacted on Palestinians. Now, I may not know much, but  I knew that either this guy was being disingenuous or just plain clueless.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Oh, tgia I am so sorry for your loss. This must have been a very difficult time for you.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Thank you vza. Well I wasn't in the mood to care for the exhibition in anyway. Many things I should have done to make sure  potential buyers and clients would attend, had been in the end dropped so in terms of sales it was less than I expected but I'm still satisfied that one major piece was among the sold ones. It saves the day. I'll post that one as soon as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  27. He should have asked a Palestinian what he thinks if he had a chance of meeting any. But there are little chancesof meeting one when the settlements are fortified castles connected to each other with Jews only roads. I'm amazed at the little curiosity, not to mention empathy,  some people like this gentleman has.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Let me transliterate Balaoney for you - fuck you

    ReplyDelete
  29. Let me transliterate "baloney" for you - fuck you

    ReplyDelete
  30. Well, I am glad you sold that major piece and look forward to seeing it posted. 
    I hope some day, when you have time, you also post your top ten or twenty or whatever, great works of art. You said you would, and I am curious to see what they will be!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Well, lets be a little more specific - step one, if you are going to get a peace negotiation going, you have to get a legitimate offer.  I seriously doubt whether you read what the Yahoo offered, here is the full text vza, when you are done with it you tell me what you think is legitimate about this offer, ok? Other than that, if you refuse, than we are back to your normal BS, taking at face value what is portrayed to you without study (the Jerusalem Post), and just giving us another Zionist diatribe -
     
    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1092810.html

    ReplyDelete
  32. I've already read it. No, He is not seriously offering anything. But he is not the last word on it all, either. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Great article.
     
    Sorry for your loss TGIA.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Ypu don't like the yahoo's squatting TGIA? Here is one that will make your blood boil -
     
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S1ujv5tKag
     
    Listen to this shithead (kucker)

    ReplyDelete
  35. TGIA, Mom is in a better place now. She will always be with you in your memories of her and in how she molded you and so many others.
     
    I would like to visit one of your art exibits sometime.

    ReplyDelete